RDaneel
Joined: Feb 24, 2023
|
  Posted:
May 17, 2024 - 14:18 |
 
|
Playing medium low TV requires more playing skills to reach similar win rate when you play a super-optimized TV team with 1 stat freak inside.
Some teams already strong at low TV (Orcs, Undead, Amazons, Vampires, Skaven, UW) become very very powerful when they reach a certain "optimum" TV (mid/high) level. Here you can afford the snake or double skull, or one turn where you did not play perfect (or your opponent had some luck) even get slaughtered and maybe break through on turn 8 because you have the super one turn maker and in worst case get a tie where at low TV you would have lost. And this is more true when such teams play with other teams not created in this obsessive way of roster maximization (made possible remember by the absence of a redraft).
I am proving it for myself: I am a half-wit, a poor coach with a win rate of just over 54 percent. Yet in the league in which I play humans at TV 1600 with a couple of stat freaks I have won games in which I have played awful simply because on turn 8 with three rerolls I was able to do Russian roulette. You have more cartridges to shoot all there
This is even more true for teams like vampires that don't even need 100 games to become really efficient.
As early as from 10 games and TV 1300 a vampire team with 2 trhowers Block and 1 leader, 1 catcher Blodge SS maybe 1 Vargeist , 9 thrall 3 RR and 1 apo can win vs whoever 3-2, suffering even 5 CAS and 1 KO: I am not saying that my 7-year-old son could easily learn to use vampires of this type and have a win rate above 70% after 16 games but with a little stubbornness it is not difficult. Nothing magic here. It just takes some stubborn mechanistic practice.
There are certain coaches who play mainly for the rating, mainly to maximize the win rate, mainly because of the desire to be able to tell the whole world that they are the strongest and have “longer ranking than you”. For them it is essential to play only and always very few races , and/or only and always at mid/high optimized TV with possibly one stat-freak in their roster.
Not playing at low TV it is not a choice dictated by boredom in my opinion. It is a lucid and fierce choice to win more.
Personally, a very famous coach in a chat mocked me by telling me that I have a low win rate while he has a higher win rate than me so he is better than me. And that made him very happy. I am glad to be able to contribute to the happiness of this site. |
_________________
To judge a man, one must at least know the secret of his thoughts, his misfortunes, his emotions, Balzac |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2024 - 14:23 |
|
If I aimed to win only for the sake of stats I could just play UW, Amazons, Norse, or another strong-at-low-TV-out-of-the-box race over and over again, saving the development time.
It's a strawman and not even good.
I could make new teams, but knowing that after 15 games I already struggle to find a game, as demonstrated by my 17-game Vampire team, is not appealing.
It's better to stick to the teams I already have. At least I don't risk easily to lose a player due to Officious Ref just because I created a new team.
Moreover, I don't like to use crappy team names. I spend some time to find decent ones.
I can't stand teams with serial numbers or other silly, not imaginative names totally unrelated to Blood Bowl. |
|
|
sebco
Joined: Feb 14, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2024 - 14:30 |
|
It is really not easy to have a balanced game on all TVs. I almost never played on high TV. I am above all a low TV tabletop coach (short leagues / NAF tournaments). In online gaming, I also ventured onto medium TV. From my point of view, in these 2 TV brackets (low and medium TV), the game is more balanced in BB 2020 than it was before. By that, I mean that the competition is tighter between the tier 1 teams (while I thought the opposite when this version was released... I feared that the elf rosters would demote but I had misjudged the power of multi-rerolls per turn).
Blood Bowl is a clever mix of strategy and luck. I like the result of the game to be determined little by little, turn by turn, based on the coaches' choices and dice. I also like that some teams are able to turn a match around in one turn, which gives variety to the game and prevents all games from feeling the same. This is why I like that BB 2020 allows both heavy and light teams to compete at the top of the rankings.
I come to vampires. It’s a team that has a real personality. Its style of play is unique. I really like vampires for that. However, in my opinion, they are one of the teams that can be frustrating to face because you have the impression of depending more on the opponent's choices and dice than on your own dice and choices. This is why I would prefer that vampires really have tier 2 results and not tier 1 results (I am convinced that at the EuroBowl, there will be vampires in the majority of high table teams for example, it is therefore not a problem which is limited to the high TV). At this stage of my knowledge of the roster (in short, it deserves to be explored further), I would say that a slight modification could already do the job. For example, a return of -1 for the target's tackle zone of a hypnotic gaze. Like this, the basic hypnotic gaze would be 3+ rather than 2+. |
_________________
I like cheese but don't call me skaven ! |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2024 - 14:33 |
|
The -1 for target's tackle zone to Gaze would be a nice change. |
|
|
RDaneel
Joined: Feb 24, 2023
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2024 - 14:34 |
|
If you want to find games create 8 new teams in 2 squad and apply to Trophy. Or apply to RRR with some new team. Or create 10 new team and apply the box, then after 15 games creates other 10 teams and apply again and keep the previos 10 to game finder.
You can play very often believe me. I use to do and I never miss a box scheduling and when i miss i have enough teams in GF to try to offer some game
I never experienced a case where i could not play for more than 20 minutes.
If your real target is to play more often you have plenty of options.
But if you apply in the Box only and play only teams with more than 15 games knowing that there is the Box 15 games limitation is normal you get less games. Expecially if your teams are also very high TV optimized because the team at TV 1500-1700 are not applied so often in Box where majority of players play Trophy
But if your REAL target is to play often simply change strategy and you will find more games. |
_________________
To judge a man, one must at least know the secret of his thoughts, his misfortunes, his emotions, Balzac |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2024 - 14:45 |
|
Since my aim is not playing at TV 1000, I would not play a game even with 4 Trophy teams, because finding TV 1000 games is not my goal.
I accept it as a necessary evil on the path to higher TV, but not more than once per race I make.
That low TV dimension for me is not playing, it's boredom. I can't even understand how people can keep on playing at low TV. I played thousands of games and I'm not interested in playing at low TV because the teams are very similar. There is not much creativity in builds because players have almost no skills or very few, and the good ones are a very narrow subset. For example, at mid TV I could bother to take Defensive on a ball carrier. At low TV I need Block first, then Dodge. All ball carriers tend to have the same skills, especially if they have just 1 or 2 skills. That removes a lot of variety from the games I play. I don't play games to be bored. My brain doesn't find interesting low TV games. Not saying they don't need coaching skill, just I personally don't like them. Playing the early games at low TV is fine, because I have the "reward" of reaching, sooner or later, a higher TV (1500 or so, I don't want to reach 2000+ TV), but if I had to play over and over ONLY at low TV I would not play Blood Bowl anymore.
Suggesting me to play RRR, Trophy, NAF or whatever low TV soup it's not going to change my mind.
It's like trying to persuade somebody to eat a food they don't like. It's a matter of personal taste, you can't change people's taste. |
|
|
asteflix
Joined: Jan 20, 2014
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 03:31 |
|
To bring this thread back on topic to high tv vampires :
My issue with the current roster is twofold ; bloodlust is simply not punishing enough with multiple rerolls per turn making sure that on your ''go'' turn you're almost unstoppable, and the runners simply being too good. High elf catcher stats with hypno gaze is just a nuts positional.
My proposal to nerf vamps is very simple. Make runners BL 3+ which would force them to coordinate with thralls instead of just running into the endzone and not really requiring thralls to support them. It would also hurt their one turn, which I know a lot of you dislike vamps having such an easy access to. |
_________________
''How do you get a cat out of a blow-up doll its stuck'' |
|
DaCrusha
Joined: Jun 21, 2010
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 06:47 |
|
yeah, they dont deserve a nerfing until underworld and skaven do. |
|
|
Joost
Joined: Mar 17, 2014
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 08:26 |
|
Underworld could certainly use a nerf but they are perhaps a problem only at low TV, unlike the vampires. And UW is more manageable now that star access is limited. And are skaven such a huge issue? |
|
|
DaCrusha
Joined: Jun 21, 2010
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 08:46 |
|
nobody can one turn as easily |
|
|
DaCrusha
Joined: Jun 21, 2010
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 08:49 |
|
to nerf vamps because they did well in a tournament, youd have to nerf all the other teams that routinely do well in tournaments |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 09:52 |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 11:01 |
|
Tournaments and perpetual BB are two different beasts. Tournament nerfs to teams supposed to be played with progression and permanent Injuries are not going to work well.
It would be better to have rosters specifically made for NAF tournaments (not by adding extra skills and Star Players, I mean radical roster changes to players statline and skills) and rosters for perpetual leagues.
For example, at TV 1000 Bloodlust 2+ can be ok. At higher TV Bloodlust 2+ with Pro and many rrs gets too good.
Gaze cancelling all the skills is very good at TV 1000, but, since the opponent players will not be much skilled, it's less powerful (relatively speaking) than Gaze cancelling all the skills at higher TV, because then more skills can be cancelled.
In other words, the power/value of a skill is related to the TV at which a roster is played and it would be better to change all the NAF rosters taking into account the TV at which the NAF games are played (1100 if I'm not wrong). |
|
|
sebco
Joined: Feb 14, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 12:41 |
|
I understand what you mean. But you seem to consider that the rules were designed for medium or even high TV play and that it is up to low TV (and NAF tourneys) to adapt with alternative/additional rules.
For my part, I think that the rules are mainly designed for short term leagues (teams starting at TV 1,000,000 up to teams reaching at the end of the season a TV of 1,500,000 or even 1,600,000 or 1,700,000 by overfarming but not more) + that there's a chapter about adapted rules for NAF style tourneys.
Perpetual leagues are not really covered by the rulebook (in my opinion, redraft rules are for leagues played with a fixed number of games, not for leagues where some teams could play hundred of games in one season).
I believe that the next version of BB will continue in this direction because the game is sold as a miniatures game and, on tabletop, that's really really easier to play at low TV (it's difficult to clearly mark many skills for each player and to have both coaches seeing these markers).
In my opinion, it will be up to the online perpetual leagues to adapt by creating additional rules (which will perhaps be recommended in the rulebook, in the same way that proposals for NAF style tournament rules appeared in BB 2020). |
_________________
I like cheese but don't call me skaven ! |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2024 - 13:40 |
|
I see. What I tried to say is, using to use the same ruleset and rosters for NAF format without progression and perpetual (or even short) leagues is bound to create issues.
If Blood Bowl must be played in NAF format then it's better to throw to the wind the skill up system and focus on balancing as much as possible the game at 1100 TV.
By the way, although I agree that low TV can be more balanced due to fewer skills creating less synergies and no stat freaks, on the other hand low TV has the issues of tier 1 teams being too good, because they already start with many skills.
It would be nice to nerf the strong starting teams, then, if we must play at low TV.
About the low TV and ease of playing it: yes, I agree that low TV is easier and more user-friendly to play due to few skills to remember, I played my share of TV 1000 games on tabletop (not tournament games, just normal one-off games with friends).
For sure is more practical, but it got old quickly for me.
Once I got more expert I wanted more depth from my games.
A higher TV (not 2000, 1400-1500 or so) gives me that extra "freshness" flavour in every game I play and, since I consider it a campaign game, I have the little joy of developing the players, which lacks in no progression format
I would be fine with a hard TV cap of 1350 in the Box. It would be a bit low for my taste but better than facing overfarmed teams . |
|
|
|
|
| |
Has Cindy Piewhistle...
Search
